Finding pH of fillet

Baer Charlton

SPFG, Supreme Picture Framing God
Joined
May 24, 2004
Posts
21,029
Loc
On FB
So the kids at the college stopped in yesterday for their "end of term, thank you for all the hard work, and give me the data" pizza.

A lot of fun, and we came up with this: "The 4S" method of finding pH. Slice, Soak, Sample, and See.

Slice
E01Slice.jpg


Soak [with distilled water for about 20-30 minutes]
E02Soak.jpg


Sample [with a pH paper which reads 1-14, instead of Litmus paper which only sees acid] Insert paper into the cut and press closed for about 30 seconds.
E03Sample.jpg


See [compare to the numbers by color]
E04See.jpg


For fabrics and matboards, they finely chopped them up [maserated] and soaked for 24-48 hours.

Some of the fillets and mouldings also got the Cuisenart process.
thumbsup.gif


Now it's time to pour over the reports.
kaffeetrinker_2.gif
 
Isn't a 7 pretty much neutral??
 
This tells us that this particular sampling exhibits neutral pH at this point in time.
We know from emperical studies that organic materials are dynamic, so this will provide a base line from which we can guage further results. In and of itself it proves little because there is no comparative reference.

Subject the same materials to long term slow oxidation in a closed system (simulating their common application) and retest for pH over predetermined periods of time. Don't forget to test the gasses in the enclosure as well.

Research is never ending, and ya gotta start somewhere.

BTW what are your theories, premise and hypothesis? Just showing us the results don't mean a lot if we don't know what you are looking for and why.
 
By the color, that looks more like a pH 6 or maybe 6.5. A difference of 1.0 in pH level represents a 10x difference in acidity, so pH 6 or 6.5 is not good.

And Wally's right. As the wood degrades over time, its lignin will create more and more acid migration.

The FACTS standard says no wood within 1" of an item to be preservation framed -- that's 1" in any plane, so a fillet is pretty much out of the picture...frame. Unless, of course, you care to place a barrier of glass or metal between the parts.

More often we inform the customer and they vote for a compromise of protective value in the framing. So, we put a metallic rabbet-tape liner on the fillet and go for it.
 
Jim, obviously you and FACTS have researched and tested pH one heck of a lot more than me or my team.

Would you please share with us or me where I can find this information about "A difference of 1.0 in pH level represents a 10x difference in acidity". In forty years, I have only heard one other person make that statement, and Don wouldn't or couldn't share where that information is.

"As the wood degrades over time, its lignin will create more and more acid migration." :eek: Where does it get more acid than is inherent in the lignin to begin with?

As for the test strip.... the orange that matches the "6" is the natural color of the dry strip. The yelllow that matches the "7" is the result of the damp wood. Hence the shape of the fillet on the strip.
 
Um, Baer, please save your brain cells for the first week in August.... ;)

Oh yes:

"A difference of one pH unit represents a tenfold change. For example, the acidity of a sample with a pH of 5 is ten times greater than a sample with a pH of 6. A difference of 2 units, from 6 to 4, would mean that the acidity is one hundred times greater, and so on"

Doncha love Google??

http://www.kernsite.com/uwp/modules/pH/pH.htm
 
Thanks Paul. That wasn't neccisarily the point, and I was just feeling slightly bloated, head-achey, feet are swollen and lets face it.. today, I'm btichy.

I did like that next statement on the sight:

"Normal rain has a pH of 5.6 - slightly acidic because of the carbon dioxide picked up in the earth's atmosphere by the rain."

The operative term here being "slightly acidic".

I guess those old sashes of baking soda we used to find in the frame jobs from the late 1800s really did something.... :eek: And I think that was a few years before FACTS... :D
 
You know Baer, I noticed that lots of people these days are conservation aware.

Just today, this customer brings in an old, framed photo (photo is 1930's she said, but the frame maybe 1970s) and she wants it framed and conserved. Tons of cardboard behind the picture, paper, the whole acidic world is lurking there....

Anyway, a nice CC frame, UV glass, AF foam-core and $800 later she's happy, God bless her.
 
Gas is up. Interest rates are up. Stock market.... well . .

So it has been weird this week. I have 7 pieces in that are getting Museum level treatment [their request]. It's a whacky world, when things are going to cost more... lets just go get those museum pieces framed dear... you know, the ones we got in Paris the last time we were there... and we aren't going this year either.... so we might as well spend our vacation money on fine framing.. bless their little pea picken hearts.

And Shar was saying how dead it's been and what a great time to get some samples done for the walls... and recover from jetlag....

and then the water supply at the house has forced our hand about redoing it... plumbers come Tuesday and start.

Thank goodness I don't have to test the pH of the new beadboard for the bathroom remodel.. I know that Corian is inert. :D
 
Originally posted by Baer Charlton:
Thanks Paul. That wasn't neccisarily the point, and I was just feeling slightly bloated, head-achey, feet are swollen and lets face it.. today, I'm btichy.

:D
I guess I missed the point also. From your statement

"Jim, obviously you and FACTS have researched and tested pH one heck of a lot more than me or my team.

Would you please share with us or me where I can find this information about "A difference of 1.0 in pH level represents a 10x difference in acidity". In forty years, I have only heard one other person make that statement, and Don wouldn't or couldn't share where that information is."


I took that to mean that allegedly Jim Miller and FACTS were in error in his/their statements. And Paul DID supply the information in question if I read the website correctly.

"As the wood degrades over time, its lignin will create more and more acid migration." Where does it get more acid than is inherent in the lignin to begin with?

I didn't see in those posts where anybody said that "it gets more acid as the wood degrades". I would guess they meant that, as the wood degrades, there is more acid migration than in fresh solid wood as the cellular structures are decomposed making migration of the existing lignin easier.

Kinda like a boy scout troop trying to walk through dense brush on a summer outing. If one were to spray Roundup on the brush, that same troop could walk easier and possibly quicker through the decomposed remains the following summer.

"As for the test strip.... the orange that matches the "6" is the natural color of the dry strip. The yelllow that matches the "7" is the result of the damp wood. Hence the shape of the fillet on the strip."

Again, I have to challenge your reasoning, Baer. In your "Sample" photo it certainly does appear that the dry natural color of the test strip is a very pastel cream color to my old reworked eyes.

E03Sample.jpg


And, aside from the statistics that Wally correctly cited for conducting a bonafide experiment with an outcome that somebody could actually use, what exactly did you come up with in this little experiment?? Since there weren't any results mentioned in your post I don't know if you were trying to prove that wood fillets are neutral in acidity or a razor blade stuck in the end of a piece of fillet makes a real neat emergency slasher weapon or what???
shrug.gif


Sorry if I seem dumber than a bag of broken hammers but I just didn't get the point of all of this.

Framerguy
 
I too must be missing something. I have seen very similar test done on mat boards and with similar results on the PH.

On the mats there are some other contaiminants to comsider and I am sure that Hugh or maybe Jim can list those factors.

But I do rememebr from the mat board testing that the PH does change with time and conditions.
I seem to remeber that "Lignin" has other contaiminateing factors to consider other than the PH ,and I am not sure if it was the lignin decomposeing or other chemical substances but just like MATS WOOD has more than PH to worry about.

But then I am not a wodworker expert ,a FACTS specialist. Nor a conservationist. So If Hugh ,Rebecca , or any of the other conservator types are listening please correct my assumptions.
BUDDY
 
Would you please share with us or me where I can find this information about "A difference of 1.0 in pH level represents a 10x difference in acidity"
If I remember my inorganic chemistry, pH is defined on a logarithmic scale when a pH of 7 is actually 1.0 x 10<sup>7</sup> hydrogen atoms. A ph of 4, therefore, would be 1000 times as acidic as a ph of 7 i.e. 10<sup>7</sup>/10<sup>4</sup> = 10<sup>3</sup> = 1000.
 
OK, from the attacks here and the flaming emails I guess people thought it was my intent to slander FACTS by my having an independent group of students conduct pH testing on products I use every day.

Here was my premise. These are products I use. I wanted this information, and it is for my edification and piece of mind alone. Which is why I won't be boring you with the results.

It also gave "field" or real-life experience to some students that would have otherwise never seen things for themselves as art history majors.

The pictures were to show a simple way of how to find the pH of a product. Nothing more.

Framerguy: the photo you needed to see was the one below.


E04See.jpg


The "6" matches the dry tape next to it.
 
The problem with wood may be peroxides more than it is acids, so sealing the wood is always a good
idea. Baer is doing a great thing, with his testing and in sharing the results so that others
can see and evaluate his results.

Hugh
 
And as Edith Ann said: "And that's the truth Ppppppp"
164266.l.jpg
 
Thank Hugh. That made it all worth while knowing that someone "gets it" besides me and a handfull of now energized students.
 
Originally posted by Baer Charlton:
I wanted this information, and it is for my edification and piece of mind alone. Which is why I won't be boring you with the results.
Originally posted by preservator:
Baer is doing a great thing, with his testing and in sharing the results so that others can see and evaluate his results.
Originally posted by Baer Charlton:
Thank Hugh. That made it all worth while knowing that someone "gets it"
Does that mean you've changed your mind about sharing the results Baer?
 
Hugh does this;"The problem with wood may be peroxides more than it is acids," Mean that the entire question and testing of PH indicates that PH Isn't the real problem in Fillets ,much like the labels on mats that claim they are ALL acid free when there are a host of other more important problems to consider?

Every Test and assurances are important but are the questions that were raised to cause them to demonstrate the HYPOTHESIS pointing out a common misconception or maybe perpetuating the very misconception.

A very few good examples are that even regular mat board is ACID FREE but laden-ed with a bunch of other problems as are many other Framing products. This then gives some uniformed newbies and consummers the conception that if something is "ACID FREE" or even close to Neutral it is safe and they don't even bother to check what the REAL problems are with that material.

Hence the mantra "It's Totally Acid Free" when sometimes they are speaking about things like GLASS. This can cause a lot of the general public to think ACID barring substances are the only problems a frame has to consider in being safe for their art.

IMHO and I hope all others when we show one potential problem it should be acompanied by ALL the others that can be a hazard, especially if they are more dangerous then the one being focused on for general inspection.

The use of Litmus paper strips can be demonstrated on a host of things even as you mentioned "Liquid suspensions of pulverized solids" of any substance. If I were watching this demonstration I would get the impression that this was a standard test done to insure that "FILLETS" were safe to use in C/P type framing and to what little I know this is a long way from being a correct assumption as Hugh's warning seems to clearly say to me.("problem with wood may be peroxides" And I still don't know how to check for Peroxides . ) Did your demonstration /Instructions show this as well along with any other hazards?
BUDDY

[ 05-16-2006, 11:11 AM: Message edited by: BUDDY ]
 
When in doubt, seal it out. No one knows exactly what goes on when paper is near wood, but we can say that keeping them separate is a good idea. Paper collections in Asia are often stored, on wood boxes in wood shelves, in wood-lined rooms, even in modern steel and concrete buildings. They know which woods resist insects and stain the least and rely on the wood to serve as a climate buffer. Their technique illustrates the fact that
wood can be used with relative safety, in proximity to paper, if one knows how to do it,
but since one can seal the wood we use in framing,
with foil/plastic laminate material, why not gain
the extra ounce of protection that affords?


Hugh
 
You might get a chuckle out of this Hugh..

as one of the kids was watching me barrier tape off the fillet [which secures it to the Alphcare mat board] she asked why we didn't have them also test the Barrier tape...

good question

so I gave her some tape. She quietly gave it back two weeks later giving me the stink-eye.

Who knew that the gummy side would cause so much problems...
lol3.gif
 
My fillets are strong enough for a man but PH balanced for a woman.
 
Back
Top